Re: DevFS vs. udev

viro
2003-12-24T03:41:24Z

On Tue, Dec 23, 2003 at 06:38:20PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:

> And yes, there are architectural/cleanliness issues with devfs. In 2.5
> Adam Richter totally reinventing devfs's internals, basing it around the
> ramfs infrastructure. If we elect to retain devfs in 2.8 then that effort
> should be resurrected.

Switching internals to ramfs won't be enough, though. There are problems
with devfs API that can't be solved by work on internals - lifetime rules
for devfs nodes make no sense. Take a look at the insertion/removal
primitives and think of the lifetime rules they create for directories and
user-created nodes. _That_ is independent from the way you implement
the internals (and sanitized version of the interface won't fit into
use of ramfs, BTW).